Technical assurance for engineering and design practices

Technical Review Framework

Nothing goes out unreviewed.

The problems we solve

Reviews you cannot see are reviews you cannot rely on.

  1. Review activities planned in someone’s head rather than in the project plan.
  2. Review effort left out of the fee, so it is the first thing squeezed when the programme tightens.
  3. Technical advice issued by email, phone or meeting that never reaches a review at all.
  4. No record of what was checked, who checked it, or what came back.
  5. Reviewers too close to the work, or to its author, to stay objective.
  6. Producer Statement authors signing against a review process they cannot see.

Our approach

We treat reviews as risk management rather than a final check. The framework decides which reviews a project needs, who is qualified to carry them out, when they happen, and what gets recorded, from fee proposal through to close-out. Your people run the reviews and your Chartered Professional Engineers sign the Producer Statements. We build the framework around them.

The system

A framework that

  1. 01

    Reduces technical risk to a level you have decided is acceptable, project by project.

  2. 02

    Prescribes only what must happen and delegates the rest to people qualified to judge, so the same framework fits a sole practitioner and a multinational.

  3. 03

    Keeps reviewers far enough from the work to stay objective, because a reviewer with an interest in the outcome is not reviewing.

The deliverables

What you receive

  1. 01

    Technical Review Procedure covering all four project stages: fee proposal, initiation and planning, delivery, and close-out.

  2. 02

    Role definitions and delegated authorities for Project Manager, Technical Oversight, Discipline Lead, Producer Statement Author and Reviewer.

  3. 03

    Technical Review Plan template scaled to project size and integrated with your project management plan.

  4. 04

    Competency Matrix recording who is approved to hold each role, with the process for keeping it current.

  5. 05

    Go / no go evaluation tool for the fee proposal stage.

  6. 06

    Rules for technical advice issued outside contract deliverables covering email, phone and meetings.

  7. 07

    Review recording conventions so comments, codes and nomenclature are common to the whole project team including external reviewers.

  8. 08

    Training for the managers and technical leaders who will run the framework.

Every practice works differently and carries a different risk appetite, so we adapt the framework to how you deliver rather than handing over a document pack.

All deliverables are yours to keep and use on every project you run from here.

The benefits

Reviews you can point to.

  1. Review effort priced into the fee rather than absorbed at the end.
  2. A defensible record of what was reviewed, by whom, and how each comment was resolved.
  3. Producer Statement authors signing against a review process they can see.
  4. Technical advice given by email or phone brought inside the review process.
  5. Reviews that survive a tight programme, because they were planned and resourced before the programme existed.
  6. One framework that fits a two-person job and a multi-discipline project, without being rewritten for either.
  7. Something you can show a client, a principal or an insurer when they ask how you manage technical risk.

Technical review

Next step

A conversation, at no cost, to work out whether the problem you have is the one this fixes. Sometimes reviews are being missed for a reason a framework will not solve, and you should know that before you spend anything.

Scope varies from adapting the framework and training your team through to implementation and ongoing assurance, so price depends on scope.

The framework is the one Touchstone designed and delivered as a one-day course for Engineering New Zealand. Participants can record it as seven hours of CPD under Engineering New Zealand’s CPD regulations.

[email protected]+64 9 243 0609